The Nation: National Party Leader Simon Bridges

• National Party Leader
Simon Bridges says he got Gerry Brownlee into his office to
discuss allegations of bullying, "looked him in the eyes,
and ... asked him clearly for an explanation about what has
gone on".

• He says he was satisfied
the allegations against Gerry Brownlee are "arrant
nonsense".

• Simon Bridges will not
commit to firing the leaker if he finds out they are from
within his own party. He says he will let the process happen
and then "deal with the cards that we’re
dealt".

Lisa Owen: It hasn't been a
great couple of weeks for the coalition. There are questions
over who's in charge, Jacinda Ardern or Winston Peters? So
it should be the perfect time to shine for an opposition
leader. But National's Simon Bridges personal polling is
stuck at around 10 per cent and the investigation into who
leaked his expenses is dragging on. He's been in the job six
months, so i asked him what his biggest achievement is so
far.

Simon Bridges: I’m
being very focused on the issues and making sure we’re
really driving policies. We’ve got great plans for New
Zealand in 2020 and keeping very strong in the polls and in
the public’s perception of the National Party as the
biggest, strongest party.

Lisa Owen: You bring
up the polls. So, you’re party is polling strongly at
about 45 per cent, but you’re on just 10 per cent. Why is
there that disconnect?

Look, I
suppose it’s hard to know exactly what’s going on. I
think we’re out of the cycle, if you like. It’s not like
it’s the hot glare of a media campaign. I certainly
don’t take it lightly. Albeit, what I would say to you is
what really matters, ultimately, is the party vote. That’s
what determines power, and it is, without overstating it,
gratifying that – not last year; not five years ago –
National’s still incredibly strongly supported under my
leadership.

Yeah, but the thing is – at some
point, you lose the mandate, don’t you? If you’re only
polling 10 per cent, can you really conceivably see yourself
as a prime minister? And at some point, your party will make
that decision. So what’s the magic number? What do you
need to get up to?

Without over analysing it,
I don’t accept that. I think if you go back and you take,
actually, any Opposition leader who’s been a strong prime
minister for the most part who didn’t come in in the very
last bit of it – you take a Clark, a you take a Bolger;
you go back through the others – even the Langes of this
world – there often is that disconnect that is there. But
I repeat – I don’t take it for granted. I don’t take
it lightly. I’ve got to keep working, and I’ve got a
couple of years to justify the faith that New Zealanders
would want to have in their prime minister.
But–

So put a goal on it, then. Put a number
on it. What are you aiming for?

I would say
the most important thing is the party
vote.

Well, that gets the party in, but it
doesn’t guarantee that the party keeps you on. And, in
fact, Bill English was 20 per cent in the preferred prime
minister stakes when he was rolled out; Little, just five
per cent; Shearer gone at 13 per cent; Cunliffe at 18 per
cent - almost double what you’re polling at the moment. So
what’s your goal?/

You’re missing the
point.

What’s your
goal?

You’re missing a fundamental point
about all of that. It wasn’t the personal approval ratings
that did them. It was the party ratings. It was where the
party was at.

Not Bill English. Not Bill
English.

No, you’re absolutely- Bill
English didn’t get rolled as leader. He decided earlier
this year that he had had a long innings in politics, he had
contributed a huge amount, and he left on his terms. My
simple point to you is actually a sensible analysis of those
numbers makes really clear it is the party vote that
matters.

So you’re not prepared to put a
number or goal that you’re headed for?

No,
but what’s true is that I don’t take it lightly. I’m
out there working. I feel very good about where we are, only
a year in. In fact, I’d say this to you, Lisa, and to New
Zealanders – we have never seen an opposition party, in
the history of New Zealand, a year in under a new government
doing as well, being as high profile, raising important
issues and actually setting the agenda the way the National
Party is today.

Okay. Well, let’s talk about
your own party support. How confident are you that you’ve
got 100 per cent support of your
caucus?

Look, I’m confident. I feel very
buoyed by the support I get, by the messages I get every
day. We are a strong, energised caucus. And you only need
to look at how we’re performing in Parliament, how we
perform in the media to see that that is
true.

Yeah, but, you know, people will be
wondering how you can possibly say that when a leak about
your travel expenses could have – and some people believe
probably did come from – within your own
party.

Look, you know, sure. I get that, and
we’re taking it seriously. There’s all sorts of
discussion about whether we should’ve or not. Actually, I
think it’s the right thing to do. We’ve got a process
that’s winding its way along, trucking along, and we’ll
see where we get to. I ultimately don’t know who it is.
What I’d say to you, Lisa – if – and it is a big if
– if it is a National Party MP or a staffer, I will be
incredibly disappointed. But I’ll tell you what – all of
my other colleagues, my members of Parliament will also be
very disappointed about that.

So disappointed
that you’d sack them?

Well, we have to see
what the circumstances are. But, you know, it will be a
mixture, I think, of being clear and strong, because it’s
not good enough if it was one of us, and we just don’t
know that yet. Let’s go through the process and see. But
we also know there are some other issues at play here,
potentially in terms of wellbeing and so on, so we’ll just
have to, look, actually exercise some clear, effective
leadership on that.

Okay. Well, there’s a few
things in there. First off, you’ve potentially got more
than one leaker, because you’ve got the person who
released your travel expenses, and then someone leaked the
fact that you had received this text, so you’ve
potentially got two leakers, haven’t you?

I
doubt that, personally.

So you think they’re
one in the same, the person who leaked the
text?

I think so. And, in fact, what we have
a sense of–

Do you have some proof about
that?

No, no. But what I do know is that the
police have made clear that the leaker is the same person as
the texter.

Yes, I’m talking about how that
text to you came into the public domain and was reported by
the media. Someone from within must have leaked
that.

I think the point of that is I
personally – and, no, I accept that it’s not on the base
of any evidence, because I don’t think actually Radio New
Zealand in the case of that leak knows who it is either –
I personally would say there’s a case for it being the
same person. But ultimately, Lisa, we don’t know. These
are legitimate questions, but let’s actually see what
happens.

So why are you so determined to find
this leaker?

Well, I’m not, actually. I’m
just answering your questions.

You’ve hired
two agencies to come in and help find this person. You are
determined to find them.

You’re putting money and energy into
this. You’ve hired two outside agencies to help you find
this person. Why are you so determined?

I
haven’t had a conversation with someone inside the party
in at least a week on these issues. These are not things
that day by day–

Why not just drop it,
then?

Because actually I think it’s the
right thing to do in terms
of–

Why?

Because of the
overall integrity of the system. I don’t think these are
things you want to see happening. They’re not desirable.
But I wouldn’t overplay it.

You’re looking
for a traitor, aren’t you? That’s what you’re
doing.

No, look, I think we’re doing the
right thing here. But all of your questions ultimately in
the fullness of time, I suspect we’ll have answers to. We
don’t today. I don’t think it’s worth getting too hung
up on.

I put it to you that the reason you are
so determined to find this person is that you are concerned
they are from within your own party, and you want to deal
with that lack of loyalty.

No, because I
think, actually, whatever the scenario was, as I say, if it
was inside my caucus, it would be very disappointing and my
colleagues would be very disappointed about someone. But let
me finish this, cos this goes exactly to what you’ve said.
But actually it would be equally troubling if it was outside
of that. So let’s see the process truck its way along,
let’s see what happens, and let’s deal with the facts as
they come.

You’re talking about strong
leadership, but you’re sitting on the fence as to whether
you would dismiss this person if they’re one of your
own.

Because I don’t have the facts yet to
make that call. I’d make the case to you, Lisa, it is
abundantly different to what we’ve seen from the Prime
Minister in recent weeks.

Why is it
different?

She has had the facts. Actually,
let’s take the Clare Curran one – she has known the
situation there. A prime minister in that situation should
get the person in, should do what we’re doing
face-to-face, look them in the eye, ask them the straight
questions and get to the bottom of it. I can’t do that
because I don’t know who the person is yet, whether it’s
in our party, whether it’s in parliamentary services,
whether it’s wider. But what we do–

You
could do it with all your MPs, and you haven’t, have you?
You haven’t pulled every one of your MPs in there and
asked them if they’ve done it.

I actually
would say today I probably have talked with all of the
Members of Parliament. I certainly have
collectively–

Have you asked them directly,
each of them? So have you asked them each directly if they
are the leaker?

Did you
think–?

That’s what you’re
suggesting.

Do you think, in the instance,
that the leaker was there that they’d say, ‘Yeah, look,
it’s me, hands up!’ I doubt that very
much.

Okay. What have you done about the
allegation that Gerry Brownlee bullied a junior lawyer
during a phone call?

I have done precisely
what Jacinda Ardern has never done in relation to the
difficult issues she’s faced. I’ve got Gerry Brownlee
in, I’ve looked him in the eyes, and I’ve asked him
clearly for an explanation about what has gone on. And I
have satisfied myself that the discussion that has come from
this law firm is arrant nonsense.

So you
believe Gerry Brownlee, then, when he says he wasn’t
bullying this person on the
phone?

Absolutely. And that’s what
leadership does. That’s what Jacinda Ardern should have
done in relation to Clare Curran. That’s what Jacinda
Ardern should have done in relation to Meka Whaitiri.
That’s what Jacinda Ardern should be doing at the moment
around a raft of complex, pretty difficult issues with Shane
Jones, with Winston Peters, with the Young Labour camp and a
lack of accountability there. It’s called
leadership.

But you’re not going to do the
same in your own house if it turns out that the leaker is
one of your own?

No, well, we haven’t got
to that yet, Lisa.

I’ve asked you
categorically – if it is someone from within your own
party, will you sack them?

I’ve made clear
what I will do, and that is–

…sit on the
fence?

No, no. We don’t know the facts yet,
Lisa. This is a silly – with respect – line of
questioning. It’s a pretty clear point. When we know the
facts, I will deal with things as they come. But we’re not
there yet, unlike where Jacinda Ardern was on Clare Curran;
on Meka Whaitiri; on Shane Jones and his defiance around her
on business stuff; on Winston Peters in a variety of areas
where he knows what he’s doing and Jacinda Ardern does
too.

People in your own party have said if you
don’t get rid of this person if they are a member of your
caucus, then you will appear weak and you will spend the
rest of your days looking over your shoulder. Are they
right?

Look, this is all speculation about
where it may go. Let’s let the process happen. Let’s see
where we’ll get to and then deal with the cards that
we’re dealt.

All right. Let’s move on to
policy and your stance on crime. You said at your National
Party conference that you’ll have the best ideas on law
and order, on how to keep people safer by keeping our most
violent predators locked up. What are those
ideas?

Pretty simple. Actually, it is being
tough on crime, on the course of crime. I don’t
think–

No change?

No, no. Do
you wanna let
me…?

Yeah.

There’s a couple
of things here – that’s crucial. Actually I defy you to
go around and say, actually, fewer prisoners means anything
other than more victims in a New Zealand context. But what
is also true, and I’ve made clear repeatedly, that
actually if Andrew Little were up for a serious conversation
about rehabilitation, about reintegration, actually about
fundamentally social investment pre and post prison –
actually during as well – we are absolutely up for that.
We started those things in government. Whether it was
Rangitahi Courts, whether it was very serious drug and
alcohol and work programmes in prison to get people ready
for the outside, those things are all right. But, you know,
it does not mean softening up on the sentencing, the bail
and the parole laws. It just doesn’t have to mean that
that’ll mean more victims of crime.

Okay. Are
you extending your hand across Parliament and saying that
you will give them cross-party support if they sit down with
you to discuss justice policy? Are you committing to
that?

I can give you this categorical
assurance. If there is genuine rehabilitation and
reintegration measures pre-prison, to stop and prevent
people getting there in the first place within prison and
actually after, that isn’t about just going soft on the
sentencing, the bail and parole. We’ll be there, and
we’ll support those measures.

You’ve said
that you want teachers to be highly respected, and part of
that is pay. So how much do you think teachers are worth in
this pay round? So they’ve been offered 3 per cent over
three years. What do you reckon is
fair?

I’ll be really clear with you – you
go look at my maiden speech. Education and the value of it
and teachers is littered throughout it.

Give me
a number.

I’m not going to give you a
number, but I have been crystal clear in the first speech I
gave to the National Party conference this year what a
priority education is, how important teacher quality is, and
that does mean higher pay for teachers. I can’t
responsibly–

Those are easy things to say
when you are not giving specifics. So the other thing you
talked about was decreasing class sizes, okay? So to what
– what class size, ratio, teacher ratio?

We
will be crystal clear on that for the election. I promise
you on the show right now that New Zealanders will know the
ratios we’re talking about going into the
election.

All right. So if you won’t name a
number, just generally, where do you think those teachers
are coming from? Because Nikki Kaye said in July 2017 that
we were 300 teachers short in Auckland alone and we know
that recruitments to teacher training are way down – way
down. So even if you won’t put a number on it, you’re
making a promise. Where are you getting the teachers
from?

So to be clear, the reason I won’t
put a number on it is right now, I’m not in government,
I’m not in negotiations. I don’t know the nuances of the
teachers’ position and what things they say will ensure
they’re valued. I think fundamentally what we’re talking
about when we’re talking about teachers is a long-run
issue where teachers no longer, to some extent, feel like
they are a respected profession in our communities, the way,
say, a lawyer or doctor is, and they should. It’s not good
enough. I know this from the teachers in my family, the
teachers in my community. Part of that is pay, and I’m
saying really clearly we should deal with that, actually.
But part of it is also conditions; it’s things like the
time they’ve got outside of classrooms; it is things like
the teacher-classroom ratios, which I think teachers would
acknowledge that would make a huge difference to the quality
of their work.

All right. We’re almost out of
time, but I just want to ask you a couple of quick things.
Very quickly, looking at what’s going on in the coalition,
in your view, yes or no, has Winston Peters gone a little
rogue?

Yeah, I think he has. In as much as we
always knew he is that rogue, and he is still acting like
the acting prime minister he was for a time, but the prime
minister is letting him do that, and that’s a failure of
leadership.

So, in saying that, if you were in
a coalition with Winston Peters, how would you handle
it?

Look, I think it’s about having clear
processes. It’s about eye-to-eye meetings. It seems to me
that isn’t happening. I don’t think anyone could deny,
looking at this government closely, what you’ve got is a
situation where both the top level but also underneath that,
there just aren’t the people and the processes to make
sure that actually on issues like refugees, everyone’s
crystal clear on what’s going on. On issues
like-

Sitting down with them and having a
conversation – that would solve
it?

Actually consistently doing that, having
people managing those things, they are all important. But
even Winston Peters knows. He knows right now that that’s
not happening. He knows that if he pushes it, he effectively
has a presidential veto on the issues of refugees, of law
and order, of industrial law, of Crown-Maori relations. A
prime minister showing leadership – a Clark or a Key –
actually they didn’t let that happen, and Jacinda
shouldn’t either.

So you could work with him,
then? You could work with him in
government?

I’m not going to get into a
discussion of where we’ll go on those things. You’ll
know our position, Lisa, come election
time.

All right. Thanks for joining me this
morning. That is Simon Bridges, the leader of the National
Party.

In response to the challenges facing Scoop and the media industry we’ve instituted an Ethical Paywall to keep the news freely available to the public.
People who use Scoop for work need to be licensed through a ScoopPro subscription under this model, they also get access to exclusive news tools.

So Jacinda Ardern and Theresa May have signed a piece of paper promising peace in our time when it comes to our trade with Britain... Right now, a statement from Theresa May on Brexit has as much credibility as a statement by Donald Trump about North Korea’s plans for scrapping its nukes. Despite her recent crushing defeat in the Commons, May is continuing to playing chicken with Britain’s future, for personal and party advantage.

ALSO:

The latest Ministry of Social Development quarterly report show that a record number of people have received hardship assistance from work and income, with an additional 40,000 hardship payments made between September and December 2018, compared to the previous quarter of the same year... More>>

The needs of acute patients will be met during tomorrow's junior doctor strike, a DHB spokesperson says... Almost 3000 junior doctors are expected to walk off the job, which will affect all DHBs apart from West Coast District Health Board. More>>

Given the ambit of MBIE’s work, almost any form of social activity could qualify as being part of MBIE’s brief, so the privacy threats posed by this training programme are extensive. The current oversight safeguards seem threadbare to non-existent. More>>

ALSO:

‘Critique is no longer enough. If anything is to really change, we need to step away from the existing framework and take a first-principles approach to rethinking what will work for the 21st century.’ More>>